It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Alabama GOP Proposes Frightening New Way To Intimidate Abortion Providers

page: 14
26
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2016 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Well that's the thing. In many of the states like this one that try these crazy measures against abortion ALSO teach abstinence only education. I showed Alabama's laws on sexual education earlier in this thread.

It's like a double whammy of hypocrisy. The go to argument pro-life people have against abortion is that these women shouldn't have gotten pregnant. Then these very same people turn around and deny these women a proper sexual education. It's absurd.


A good reason not to live in that State, there are a lot of States I would not live in for many reasons... People vote in those that push this so in a way the State is getting what the majority wants, I guess.




posted on Feb, 25 2016 @ 11:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3

I am woman. I have known one friend who Did not want to keep til term. You are a liar or you have bad friends.


I was pretty wild back in the 80s... Also just maybe we have lived two different paths in life, but then it seems by your words your life is setting the standard we all should live by...lol

Lastly, knowing a few out of 80 million is not really stretching it don't you think?

edit on 25-2-2016 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2016 @ 11:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

LOL, that struck me as funny. Because, I always say sorry if I kill an ant, or fly, or even a flea --- just kind of a vague sadness. I've often wondered how many anti-abortionist say sorry when they take the life of an ant, or fly.

Would I feel sorry for destroying their eggs? NO.

A potential ant is not an ant. A potential human is not a living, viable human.

It's no ones business, but the one who's making the choice. Just as you make the choice to swat a fly, or use ant spray. It is you who lives with the choices you make.


I get upset when I see bees die....



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 05:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ok, so I just read over those rules, I normally stay out of the abortion debate since it's pointless but from what I read they say, abstinence is the only option for school age people. Then they go into morals and ethics as to why you should practice abstinence. Then they conclude it with the costs of getting pregnant.

That whole thing is literally a how to checklist to encourage someone to get an abortion. No contraceptives, morals and ethics they don't agree with in the moment, and then pregnancy. Abortion simply makes all of that go away. Undoes the mistake.

Do these people read their own guidelines? If they want to stop abortions, then perhaps they should give out contraceptives and teach people how to use them. Abstinence clearly isn't causing people to not have sex.

The sex ed teachers saying this stuff may have just won the award for the most immoral profession in the US. Ironic since a large part of their platform is in preaching morals.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 05:10 AM
link   
The very best way to stop abortions is to keep women and girls from getting pregnant.

This is beyond simplistic.

Yet, as we can see in the body of Alabama law that Krazy listed, in the reactions and evangelism of folks here ... all efforts at uniform sex education and easy accessibility of birth control methods meet with further hew and cry from Conservatives.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero
Have you ever considered that each day millions of girls become women? Suseptical to being pregnant from about 13? I don't believe women have abortions repeatedly for birth control. And if they do, it is failure of Doctor to not recognize a mentally unstable person. Like Octo mom.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Xtrozero
Have you ever considered that each day millions of girls become women? Suseptical to being pregnant from about 13? I don't believe women have abortions repeatedly for birth control. And if they do, it is failure of Doctor to not recognize a mentally unstable person. Like Octo mom.



Here's one interesting side of the inconsistencies of the arguments from the Right ... associated with your observation.

Support of pro-choice is really a veiled eugenics program directed at obliterating certain low income populations, while at the same time, liberals support the high birth rate as part of a strategy to enable so-called "Welfare Queens" to "get rich" off of government child-support programs.

So apparently, simultaneously, "leftists" are involved in some elaborate sort of paradoxical "genocide-by-breeding" program.

This apparently actually makes perfect sense in the minds of many.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   
It's not abortion they are worried about. It's sex without punishment. These same kooks have no problem with capital punishment. It's ok to kill them once they are born but not before.

Anybody who believes you can make money by having kids obviously doesn't know what the govt gives "welfare mothers" and what it costs to raise a kid.
edit on Fri February 26th, 2016 by damwel because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: damwel
It's ok to kill them once they are born but not before.

Anybody who believes you can make money by having kids obviously doesn't know what the govt gives "welfare mothers" and what it costs to raise a kid.


Yes, we've already seen that connection above ... several took the opportunity to slaver over the prospect of more people on Death Row being "taken out" I think is how one put it.

And yes, those who haven't bothered to find out anything about how Welfare works since the 80s have no idea what people go through in 2016. Well noted!



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I would rather a law be passed for politicians to disclose all kick back and lobbyist money they receive, and exactly from whom.

Far more interesting reading, IMO, than the salary of a doctor who performs procedures on patients who come to THEM voluntarily.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: ladyvalkyrie
I would rather a law be passed for politicians to disclose all kick back and lobbyist money they receive, and exactly from whom.

Far more interesting reading, IMO, than the salary of a doctor who performs procedures on patients who come to THEM voluntarily.


LOL ... I would prefer that the government just stay out of everyone's business as much as possible.

But yes, a Register of Kick-Backs would make interesting reading, I'm sure ...



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: neo96


You don't seem to mind tyranny, as long as you agree with it!



Forced birthers actually embrace and encourage tyranny. It's not so much that they don't mind it. They scream for it.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: spinalremain

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: neo96


You don't seem to mind tyranny, as long as you agree with it!



Forced birthers actually embrace and encourage tyranny. It's not so much that they don't mind it. They scream for it.


The right-wing is authoritarian by nature. They can't help it ... "frustrated policemen."



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Alabama GOP Proposes Frightening New Way To Intimidate Abortion Providers


An Alabama state House committee held a hearing Tuesday morning on a bill that would require abortion providers to disclose their annual income to patients, the portion of that income earned from performing abortions and how much they lose monetarily when a patient backs out of the procedure.

The so-called “conflict of interest disclaimer” is just one provision of the “Ultrasound Access Act” proposed by Republican state Rep. Kerry Rich earlier this month. The bill would also require abortion providers to tell patients, both orally and in writing 48 hours before the procedure, about the proposed abortion method, gestational characteristics of the fetus, “immediate and long-term physical and psychological risks” and abortion alternatives. Doctors found to have broken the law would face a fine of up to $1 million and/or a prison sentence of up to 10 years.


Ok. This is just f'ing stupid. Why is it necessary to disclose financial information to someone seeking a medical procedure?


Biased counseling and waiting period requirements meant to dissuade abortion patients from having the procedure aren’t new, and neither are mandatory ultrasound laws. But the “conflict of interest disclaimer” appears to be a new attempt to intimidate abortion providers and cast them more as profiteers rather than providers of a constitutionally-protected form of health care.

"It is absurd to target abortion providers by requiring that they disclose their salary and a breakdown of their personal finances to their patients; something no other healthcare provider in Alabama is required to do," Staci Fox, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeast, said in a statement emailed The Huffington Post. "This is yet another example of how extreme politicians introduce unnecessary government interference into the doctor-patient relationship as part of a broader effort to end access to safe, legal abortion. ... The bottom line is this law is a demeaning intrusion on the personal, private relationship between women and their doctors.”



The bill is an illustration of how abortion is singled out from other outpatient medical services to stigmatize the procedure. State legislators aren’t calling for gastroenterologists to tell colonoscopy patients how much they make each year, for instance, or requiring ophthalmologists to disclose to their patients the proportion of their income derived from cataract surgeries.


Exactly, so why is it necessary to tell patients how much the doctor giving them an abortion makes? You know if the GOP would just EMBRACE contraceptives and adequate sexual education they wouldn't have to worry about people getting pregnant and getting abortions. But nah, it's much easier to make these people jump through hoops to do things THEY disapprove of.


What if the local population votes for this?

What if the supreme court interpreted the law and says it is constitutional?

What will you say then?



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

I would warn that every healthcare provider, every business and non profit, and those who work for them are at risk of having to live under the same rules...

I would insist that every religious affiliated hospital be under similar rules, and force to place disclaimers on their wall and in their ads listing the services that they will deny women based on their religious beliefs and that they explain clearly and precisely to the best of their ability just how those policies may effect the patient's care, how it could endanger them, when exceptions to those policies would occur, ect. and I would also insist that there would have to be at least one hospital in the area that didn't operate under such rules before these religious affiliated groups could buy any hospitals in an area.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

So ... let's see just going on the text of the Constitution ... what basis would there be to find this law "Constitutional"?

Which power of the US or Alabama (under either Constitution) gives the legislature the right to single out individual citizens and force them to reveal their private salaries to any potential customer in order to engage in commerce?


edit on 26-2-2016 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Alabama GOP Proposes Frightening New Way To Intimidate Abortion Providers


An Alabama state House committee held a hearing Tuesday morning on a bill that would require abortion providers to disclose their annual income to patients, the portion of that income earned from performing abortions and how much they lose monetarily when a patient backs out of the procedure.

The so-called “conflict of interest disclaimer” is just one provision of the “Ultrasound Access Act” proposed by Republican state Rep. Kerry Rich earlier this month. The bill would also require abortion providers to tell patients, both orally and in writing 48 hours before the procedure, about the proposed abortion method, gestational characteristics of the fetus, “immediate and long-term physical and psychological risks” and abortion alternatives. Doctors found to have broken the law would face a fine of up to $1 million and/or a prison sentence of up to 10 years.


Ok. This is just f'ing stupid. Why is it necessary to disclose financial information to someone seeking a medical procedure?


Biased counseling and waiting period requirements meant to dissuade abortion patients from having the procedure aren’t new, and neither are mandatory ultrasound laws. But the “conflict of interest disclaimer” appears to be a new attempt to intimidate abortion providers and cast them more as profiteers rather than providers of a constitutionally-protected form of health care.

"It is absurd to target abortion providers by requiring that they disclose their salary and a breakdown of their personal finances to their patients; something no other healthcare provider in Alabama is required to do," Staci Fox, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeast, said in a statement emailed The Huffington Post. "This is yet another example of how extreme politicians introduce unnecessary government interference into the doctor-patient relationship as part of a broader effort to end access to safe, legal abortion. ... The bottom line is this law is a demeaning intrusion on the personal, private relationship between women and their doctors.”



The bill is an illustration of how abortion is singled out from other outpatient medical services to stigmatize the procedure. State legislators aren’t calling for gastroenterologists to tell colonoscopy patients how much they make each year, for instance, or requiring ophthalmologists to disclose to their patients the proportion of their income derived from cataract surgeries.


Exactly, so why is it necessary to tell patients how much the doctor giving them an abortion makes? You know if the GOP would just EMBRACE contraceptives and adequate sexual education they wouldn't have to worry about people getting pregnant and getting abortions. But nah, it's much easier to make these people jump through hoops to do things THEY disapprove of.


What if the local population votes for this?

What if the supreme court interpreted the law and says it is constitutional?

What will you say then?


I already said it.


This is just f'ing stupid.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 01:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Selective outrage about a PROPOSAL in a single state.

Whereas the ACA is LAW that effects every single American in this country in all '57' states.


There's a difference between the government having what is effectively demographics information and forcing a doctor to tell a patient how much money is personally going to them and their financial stake in the procedure.

That said, having a centralized database of essentially everyones identity is a really bad idea and the worst part of the ACA.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 02:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: AmericanRealist
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I got that covered. It is having to hear other kids talk about the perverse things they watched while they playing with mine at the park that disturbs me. Must have pervert parents or something to allow their children watch shows like Family Guy, American Dad, Southpark and so on.


Just going to throw this out there, you can't keep your children locked in a bubble. Eventually your kids are going to grow up and be out on their own where they will be exposed to many things you may not approve of. It's much better for your children to expose them when you're still right there to discuss things as they happen.



posted on Apr, 7 2016 @ 09:57 PM
link   
yes. We live in a savage world



new topics




 
26
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join